Synergistic bacillus thuringiensis subsp. kurstaki and cyantraniliprole mixtures for diamondback moth, beet armyworm, sugarcane borer, and soybean looper control

ABSTRACT

The present invention generally relates to the use of synergistic amounts of  Bacillus thuringiensis  subsp.  kurstaki  and cyantraniliprole for the control of diamondback moths, Beet armyworm, sugarcane borer, and Soybean looper. Specifically, the synergistic weight ratio of  Bacillus thuringiensis  subsp.  kurstaki  to cyantraniliprole is from about 1:0.0025 to about 1:15.

FIELD OF THE INVENTION

The present invention generally relates to the use of synergistic amounts of Bacillus thuringiensis subsp. kurstaki and cyantraniliprole for the control of diamondback moth, beet armyworm, sugarcane borer, and soybean looper.

BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION

Lepidoptera is an order of insects which includes moths and butterflies. It is estimated that there are over 174,000 Lepidopteran species, included in an estimated 126 families. Lepidopteran species undergo a complete metamorphosis during their life cycle. Adults mate and lay eggs. The larvae that emerge from the eggs have a cylindrical body and chewing mouth parts. Larvae undergo several growth stages called instars until they reach their terminal instar and then pupate. Lepidoptera then emerge as adult butterflies or moths.

While some Lepidoptera species are generally considered beneficial organisms due to their aesthetic appeal, many species cause devastating damage to crops. Specifically, diamondback moths, beet armyworms, sugarcane borers, soybean loopers and corn earworms are especially problematic to crop growers.

Diamondback moths (Plutella xylostella) are a widespread pest that can disperse long distances. Diamondback moth larvae eat the leaves, buds, flowers and seed-buds of cruciferous plants. A heavy infestation can completely remove all foliar tissue from a plant leaving only the leaf veins. Even a lighter infestation can result in the unsuitability of an entire lot of produce for sale. In the past, diamondback moths have been treated with a variety of insecticides including pyrethroids and other insecticides.

Beet armyworms (Spodoptera exigua) are another widespread pest that is difficult to control. The larvae are voracious eaters that defoliate host plants. Older instars can also burrow into the plants. The damage to the host plant renders it unmarketable. Beet armyworms are pests on numerous types of crops.

Soybean loopers (Chrysodeixis includens) are a moth that is prevalent in North and South America. The larvae of soybean loopers can inflict heavy foliage damage resulting in significant crop loss. Soybean loopers are difficult to control with insecticides. Infestation of soybean loopers can be exacerbated after a non-selective insecticide removes the soybean loopers' natural predators.

Southwestern corn borers (Diatraea grandiosella) are a moth with a range extending from the southern United States to Central America. Southwestern corn borers are pest to highly consumed and profitable crops such as corn and sugarcane. The larvae feed within the whorl of the corn plant early in the life cycle of the plant often destroying the bud resulting in complete loss of yield.

Sugarcane borers (Diatraea saccharalis) mostly attack sugarcane and sweet corn crops, but will also infest other host plants. The larvae burrow into the stalks of the older plants causing the plant to weaken and break off or die. In younger plants, the inner whorl of leaves will die and yields will be impacted. Secondary fungal infections may also commonly occur as a result of seed cane predation. There has been some success in controlling sugarcane borers with insecticides but they need to be applied to the plants before the larvae burrow into the stalks.

Corn earworms (Helicoverpa zea) have been referred to as the most costly crop pest in the United States. Corn earworms are difficult to control with insecticides because they can burrow into the plants and avoid exposure to insecticide applications. Corn earworms have numerous natural predators but predators and parasitoids alone are not effective at preventing crop plant damage by Helicoverpa zea.

Cabbage loopers (Trichoplusia ni) are another widespread pest that can disperse long distances. Cabbage loopers eat leaves of many crops including cabbage, broccoli, cauliflower, turnip, rapeseed, mustard, radish horseradish, cress, wasabi, watercress, tomato, cucumber, collard greens and potato. Cabbage loopers are difficult to control and have displayed resistance to Dipel® (available from Valent BioSciences LLC, Dipel is a registered trademark of Valent BioSciences LLC). Janmaat, A F et al., Rapid evolution and the cost of resistance to Bacillus thuringiensis in greenhouse populations of cabbage loopers, Trichoplusia ni., Proc Biol Sci. 2003 Nov. 7, 270(1530), 2263-2270.

Bacillus thuringiensis is a natural soil bacterium. Many Bacillus thuringiensis strains produce crystal proteins during sporulation called δ-endotoxins which can be used as biological insecticides. Bacillus thuringiensis, subspecies kurstaki, produces a crystal which paralyzes the digestive system of some larvae within minutes. The larvae eventually die of starvation. Bacillus thuringiensis subsp. kurstaki is commercially available as DiPel® (available from Valent BioSciences LLC, DiPel is a registered trademark of Valent BioSciences LLC).

One advantage of using Bacillus thuringiensis subsp. kurstaki is that it is target specific. It does not harm humans or other non-target species. Frequently when plants are treated with a non-selective insecticide, the insecticide also kills natural predators of other pests. This can cause a rebound effect in the target insect or other opportunistic pest species. For example, after applying a non-selective pesticide to kill corn borers, a spider mite infestation might occur because the non-selective pesticide also killed the spider mites' natural predators.

Yet another advantage of Bacillus thuringiensis subsp. kurstaki is that it can be used on organic crops. With no mandated pre-harvest interval, it can also be used on crops right before harvest. This provides organic growers, who have few options for pest control, a safe and effective way to manage insect infestations that could ultimately ruin an entire crop.

Cyantraniliprole (3-Bromo-1-(3-chloro-2-pyridinyl)-N-[4-cyano-2-methyl-6-(methylcarbamoyl)phenyl]-1H-pyrazole-5-carboxamide is an anthranilic diamide. Cyantraniliprole has low toxicity to humans and mammals. Further, it is effective at low use rates. Like Bacillus thuringiensis, cyantraniliprole is most effective when eaten by larvae. Cyantraniliprole forces muscles within the larvae to release all of their stored calcium, causing the larvae to stop eating and eventually die. Cyantraniliprole is commercially available, for example, as Exirel® (available from DuPont, Exirel is a registered trademark of E.I. du Pont de Nemours and Company).

Accordingly, there is a need for safe and effective ways to control diamondback moth, beet armyworm, sugarcane borer, and soybean looper. These methods should be easy to apply, have increased efficacy, and be cost effective.

SUMMARY OF THE INVENTION

The present invention is directed to methods for controlling diamondback moth (Plutella xylostella), beet armyworm (Spodoptera exigua), sugarcane borer (Diatraea saccharalis), and soybean looper (Chrysodeixis includens) comprising applying a synergistic amount of Bacillus thuringiensis subsp. kurstaki and cyantraniliprole to a plant, wherein the weight ratio of Bacillus thuringiensis subsp. kurstaki to cyantraniliprole is from about 1:0.0025 to about 1:15.

DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF THE INVENTION

Applicant discovered that the use of Bacillus thuringiensis subsp. kurstaki and cyantraniliprole at a weight ratio range of from about 1:0.0025 to about 1:15 provided unexpected synergistic effects against specific Lepidopteran species. This synergy was unexpected because the response to the treatment was highly species specific and even species within the same genera had different results. For example, this mixture exhibited synergy against diamondback moth, beet armyworm, sugarcane borer and soybean looper but didn't exhibit synergy against, southwestern corn borer corn earworm and cabbage looper. Accordingly, a species' response to the Bacillus thuringiensis subsp. kurstaki and cyantraniliprole mixtures was very unpredictable and the observation of synergy was not expected.

The Bacillus thuringiensis subsp. kurstaki and cyantraniliprole synergistic mixtures are also safe to use on edible plants. Further, the components of the mixtures are target specific and pose low to no risk to beneficial insects or animals.

Another advantage of the present invention is that the combination of Bacillus thuringiensis subsp. kurstaki and cyantraniliprole aligns with Integrated Pest Management (IPM) principles. As mentioned above, in several areas of the world, the larvae have begun to develop resistance to cyantraniliprole. By combining two different products with different modes of action, the ability of the insects to dominantly express mutations which overcome both the Bacillus thuringiensis subsp. kurstaki and cyantraniliprole is very unlikely. This means that the mixture of Bacillus thuringiensis subsp. kurstaki and cyantraniliprole can be applied repeatedly in the same season and year after year with minimal risk of resistance developing.

Yet another advantage of the present invention is that it allows for less Bacillus thuringiensis subsp. kurstaki and less cyantraniliprole to be applied to the plant. For example, within label rates, sub-lethal doses of each can be applied to achieve a lethal dose and control of the larvae. This allows for a significant cost saving to the grower.

A further advantage is that Bacillus thuringiensis subsp. kurstaki and cyantraniliprole are target-specific. This means that humans and other, non-target organisms—such as natural predators of diamondback moth, beet armyworm, sugarcane borer, and soybean looper—will not be harmed by the methods of the present invention.

In an embodiment, the present invention is directed to methods for controlling a crop plant pest selected from the group consisting of diamondback moth (Plutella xylostella), beet armyworm (Spodoptera exigua), sugarcane borer (Diatraea saccharalis), and soybean looper (Chrysodeixis includens) comprising applying a synergistic amount of Bacillus thuringiensis subsp. kurstaki and cyantraniliprole to a plant, wherein the weight ratio of Bacillus thuringiensis subsp. kurstaki to cyantraniliprole is from about 1:0.0025 to about 1:15.

As used herein, “crop plant pest” only refers to diamondback moth (Plutella xylostella), beet armyworm (Spodoptera exigua), sugarcane borer (Diatraea saccharalis), and soybean looper (Chrysodeixis includens).

In a preferred embodiment, the weight ratio of Bacillus thuringiensis subsp. kurstaki to cyantraniliprole is from about 1:0.01 to about 1:7.5. In a more preferred embodiment, the weight ratio of Bacillus thuringiensis subsp. kurstaki to cyantraniliprole is from about 1:0.04 to about 1:3.5.

In another embodiment, the present invention is directed to methods for controlling a crop plant pest wherein the amount of Bacillus thuringiensis subsp. kurstaki is from about 50 to about 4,500 grams per hectare. In a preferred embodiment, the amount of Bacillus thuringiensis subsp. kurstaki is from about 100 to about 1,300 grams per hectare. In a more preferred embodiment, the amount of Bacillus thuringiensis subsp. kurstaki is from about 150 to about 1,250 grams per hectare.

In a further embodiment, the present invention is directed to methods for controlling a crop plant pest wherein the amount of Bacillus thuringiensis subsp. kurstaki is from about 7,000 to about 200,000 IU/mg. In a preferred embodiment, the amount of Bacillus thuringiensis subsp. kurstaki is from about 20,000 to about 170,000 IU/mg. In a more preferred embodiment, the amount of Bacillus thuringiensis subsp. kurstaki is from about 25,000 to about 100,000 IU/mg.

In yet another embodiment, the present invention is directed to methods for controlling a crop plant pest wherein the amount of Bacillus thuringiensis subsp. kurstaki is from about 5,000 to about 100,000 Spodoptera U/mg. In a preferred embodiment, the amount of Bacillus thuringiensis subsp. kurstaki is from about 20,000 to about 90,000 Spodoptera U/mg. In a more preferred embodiment, the amount of Bacillus thuringiensis subsp. kurstaki is from about 40,000 to about 70,000 Spodoptera U/mg.

Although in some embodiments, the rates of Bacillus thuringiensis subsp. kurstaki are expressed in grams/hectare, IU/mg, or Spodoptera U/mg, the invention is not limited to these methods of measuring potency. If other products are developed or marketed with other potency measurements, it is within the knowledge of one of skill in the art, based on Applicant's teaching herein, to convert the rates to effective amounts consistent with the invention herein to achieve synergistic control of the target crop plant pest.

Further, the present invention is not limited to a specific type of formulation. For example, in the examples herein, a dry flowable granular formulation was used as the source of Bacillus thuringiensis kurstaki. However, other types of formulations may be used, including but not limited to, wettable powder formulations, water dispersible granules, granules, and emulsifiable suspension concentrates. Technical grade powders may also be used.

Suitable Bacillus thuringiensis subsp. kurstaki subspecies strains include, but are not limited to, VBTS-2546, BMP-123, EG-2348, EVB113-19, HD-1, PB-54, SA-11, SA-12, SB4, Z-52, EG-7841, ABTS-351, VBTS-2528, and transconjugated, recombinant and/or genetically engineered subspecies thereof.

Suitable Bacillus thuringiensis subsp. kurstaki commercial products include, but are not limited to, DiPel® (as indicated above, available from Valent BioSciences LLC, DiPel is a registered trademark of Valent BioSciences LLC), BMP 123 (available from Becker Microbials), Lepinox Plus (available from CBC Biogard), Rapax (available from CBC Biogard), Bioprotec 3P (available from AEF Global), Bacillus Chemia (available from Chemia), Biolary (available from Agrimix), Bacillus Agrogen WP (available from Yaser Ltd), Merger/Belthirul (available from Probelte), Delfin (available from Certis), Javelin® WG (available from Certis, Javelin is a registered trademark of Certis USA, L.L.C.), Costar® (available from Certis, Costar is a registered trademark of Certis USA, L.L.C.), Deliver® (available from Certis, Deliver is a registered trademark of Certis USA, L.L.C.), BeTa Pro (available from BASF), Biolep (available from Biotech International Ltd), Full-Bac WDG (available from Becker Microbial), Bacillus MiPeru WP (available from Manejos Integrados Peru SA), and Crymax® (available from Certis, Crymax is a registered trademark of Certis USA, L.L.C.).

In yet another embodiment, the present invention is directed to methods for controlling a crop plant pest wherein the amount of cyantraniliprole is from about 10 to about 700 grams per hectare. In a preferred embodiment, the amount of cyantraniliprole is from about 25 to about 600 grams per hectare. In a more preferred embodiment, the amount of cyantraniliprole is from about 50 to about 525 grams per hectare.

The examples herein used a commercial product of cyantraniliprole but the invention is not limited to the use of this commercial product. Suitable cyantraniliprole products include, but are not limited to, Exirel® (as indicated above, available from E.I. du Pont de Nemours and Company).

In a further embodiment, the present invention is directed to methods for controlling a crop plant pest comprising applying a synergistic amount of Bacillus thuringiensis subsp. kurstaki and cyantraniliprole to a plant, wherein the weight ratio of Bacillus thuringiensis subsp. kurstaki to cyantraniliprole is from about 1:0.0025 to about 1:15, and wherein the plant is selected from the group consisting of root, corm and tuber vegetables, bulb vegetables, leafy non-brassica vegetables, leafy brassica vegetables, succulent or dried legumes, fruiting vegetables, cucurbit vegetables, citrus fruits, pome fruits, stone fruits, berry and small fruits, tree nuts, cereal grains, forage and fodder grasses and hay, herbs, spices, artichoke, asparagus, coffee, cotton, tropical fruits, hops, malanga, peanut, pomegranate, oil seed vegetables, sugarcane, tobacco, and watercress.

In another embodiment, the crop plant is genetically modified. A “genetically modified” crop plant is one that has had specific genes removed, modified or additional gene copies of native or foreign DNA. The change in the crop plant's DNA may result in can result in changes in the type or amount of RNA, proteins and/or other molecules that the crop plant produces which may affect its response to abiotic (e.g., herbicide) or biotic (e.g., insects) stresses, and/or affect its growth, development, or yield.

In a preferred embodiment, the root and tuber vegetables are selected from the group consisting of arracacha, arrowroot, Chinese artichoke, Jerusalem artichoke, garden beet, sugar beet, edible burdock, edible canna, carrot, bitter cassava, sweet cassava, celeriac, root chayote, turnip-rooted chervil, chicory, chufa, dasheen (taro), ginger, ginseng, horseradish, leren, turnip-rooted parsley, parsnip, potato, radish, oriental radish, rutabaga, salsify, black salsify, Spanish salsify, skirret, sweet potato, tanier, turmeric, turnip, yam bean, true yam, and cultivars, varieties and hybrids thereof.

In another preferred embodiment, the bulb vegetables are selected from the group consisting of fresh chive leaves, fresh Chinese chive leaves, bulb daylily, elegans Hosta, bulb fritillaria, fritillaria leaves, bulb garlic, great-headed bulb garlic, serpent bulb garlic, kurrat, lady's leek, leek, wild leek, bulb lily, Beltsville bunching onion, bulb onion, Chinese bulb onion, fresh onion, green onion, macrostem onion, pearl onion, potato bulb onion, potato bulb, tree onion tops, Welsh onion tops, bulb shallot, fresh shallot leaves, and cultivars, varieties and hybrids thereof.

In a further embodiment, the leafy non-brassica vegetables are selected from the group consisting of Chinese spinach Amaranth, leafy Amaranth, arugula (roquette), cardoon, celery, Chinese celery, celtuce, chervil, Chinese spinach, edible-leaved chrysanthemum, garland chrysanthemum, corn salad, garden cress, upland cress, dandelion, dandelion leaves, sorrels (dock), endive (escarole), Florence fennel, head lettuce, leaf lettuce, orach, parsley, garden purslane, winter purslane, radicchio (red chicory), rhubarb, spinach, New Zealand spinach, vine spinach, Swiss chard, Tampala, and cultivars, varieties and hybrids thereof.

In another embodiment, the leafy brassica vegetables are selected from the group consisting of broccoli, Chinese broccoli (gai lon), broccoli raab (rapini), Brussels sprouts, cabbage, Chinese cabbage (bok choy), Chinese napa cabbage, Chinese mustard cabbage (gai choy), cauliflower, cavalo broccoli, collards, kale, kohlrabi, mizuna, mustard greens, mustard spinach, rape greens, turnip greens and cultivars, varieties and hybrids thereof.

In yet another embodiment, the succulent or dried vegetable legumes are selected from the group consisting of Lupinus beans, Phaseolus beans, Vigna beans, broad beans (fava), chickpea (garbanzo), guar, jackbean, lablab bean, lentil, Pisum peas, pigeon pea, soybean, immature seed soybean, sword bean, peanut, and cultivars, varieties and hybrids thereof. In a preferred embodiment, the Lupinus beans include grain lupin, sweet lupin, white lupin, white sweet lupin, and hybrids thereof. In another preferred embodiment, the Phaseolus beans include field bean, kidney bean, lima bean, navy bean, pinto bean, runner bean, snap bean, tepary bean, wax bean, and hybrids thereof. In yet another preferred embodiment, the Vigna beans include adzuki bean, asparagus bean, blackeyed bean, catjang, Chinese longbean, cowpea, Crowder pea, moth bean, mung bean, rice bean, southern pea, urd bean, yardlong bean, and hybrids thereof. In another embodiment, the Pisum peas include dwarf pea, edible-podded pea, English pea, field pea, garden pea, green pea, snow pea, sugar snap pea, and hybrids thereof. In a preferred embodiment, the dried vegetable legume is soybean. In a more preferred embodiment, the dried vegetable legume is genetically modified soybean.

In a further embodiment, the fruiting vegetables are selected from the group consisting of bush tomato, cocona, currant tomato, garden huckleberry, goji berry, groundcherry, martynia, naranjilla, okra, pea eggplant, pepino, peppers, non-bell peppers, roselle, eggplant, scarlet eggplant, African eggplant, sunberry, tomatillo, tomato, tree tomato, and cultivars, varieties and hybrids thereof. In a preferred embodiment, the peppers include bell peppers, chili pepper, cooking pepper, pimento, sweet peppers, and hybrids thereof.

In an embodiment, the cucurbit vegetables are selected from the group consisting of Chayote, Chayote fruit, waxgourd (Chinese preserving melon), citron melon, cucumber, gherkin, edible gourds, Momordica species, muskmelons, pumpkins, summer squashes, winter squashes, watermelon, and cultivars, varieties and hybrids thereof. In a preferred embodiment, edible gourds include hyotan, cucuzza, hechima, Chinese okra, and hybrids thereof. In another preferred embodiment, the Momordica vegetables include balsam apple, balsam pear, bittermelon, Chinese cucumber, and hybrids thereof. In another preferred embodiment, the muskmelon include true cantaloupe, cantaloupe, casaba, crenshaw melon, golden pershaw melon, honeydew melon, honey balls, mango melon, Persian melon, pineapple melon, Santa Claus melon, snake melon, and hybrids thereof. In yet another preferred embodiment, the summer squash include crookneck squash, scallop squash, straightneck squash, vegetable marrow, zucchini, and hybrids thereof. In a further preferred embodiment, the winter squash includes butternut squash, calabaza, hubbard squash, acorn squash, spaghetti squash, and hybrids thereof.

In another embodiment, the citrus fruits are selected from the group consisting of limes, calamondin, citron, grapefruit, Japanese summer grapefruit, kumquat, lemons, Mediterranean mandarin, sour orange, sweet orange, pummelo, Satsuma mandarin, tachibana orange, tangelo, mandarin tangerine, tangor, trifoliate orange, uniq fruit, and cultivars, varieties and hybrids thereof. In a preferred embodiment, the limes are selected from the group consisting of Australian desert lime, Australian finger lime, Australian round lime, Brown River finger lime, mount white lime, New Guinea wild lime, sweet lime, Russell River lime, Tahiti lime, and hybrids thereof.

In an embodiment, the pome fruits are selected from the group consisting of apple, azarole, crabapple, loquat, mayhaw, medlar, pear, Asian pear, quince, Chinese quince, Japanese quince, tejocote, and cultivars, varieties and hybrids thereof.

In another embodiment, the stone fruits are selected from the group consisting of apricot, sweet cherry, tart cherry, nectarine, peach, plum, Chicksaw plum, Damson plum, Japanese plum, plumcot, fresh prune, and cultivars, varieties and hybrids thereof.

In a further embodiment, the berries and small fruits are selected from the group consisting of Amur river grape, aronia berry, bayberry, bearberry, bilberry, blackberry, blueberry, lowbush blueberry, highbush blueberry, buffalo currant, buffaloberry, che, Chilean guava, chokecherry, cloudberry, cranberry, highbush cranberry, black currant, red currant, elderberry, European barberry, gooseberry, grape, edible honeysuckle, huckleberry, jostaberry, Juneberry (Saskatoon berry), lingonberry, maypop, mountain pepper berries, mulberry, muntries, native currant, partridgeberry, phalsa, pincherry, black raspberry, red raspberry, riberry, salal, schisandra berry, sea buckthorn, serviceberry, strawberry, wild raspberry, and cultivars, varieties and hybrids thereof. In a preferred embodiment, the blackberries include Andean blackberry, arctic blackberry, bingleberry, black satin berry, boysenberry, brombeere, California blackberry, Chesterberry, Cherokee blackberry, Cheyenne blackberry, common blackberry, coryberry, darrowberry, dewberry, Dirksen thornless berry, evergreen blackberry, Himalayaberry, hullberry, lavacaberry, loganberry, lowberry, Lucreliaberry, mammoth blackberry, marionberry, mora, mures deronce, nectarberry, Northern dewberry, olallieberry, Oregon evergreen berry, phenomenalberry, rangeberry, ravenberry, rossberry, Shawnee blackberry, Southern dewberry, tayberry, youngberry, zarzamora, and hybrids thereof.

In another embodiment, the tree nuts are selected from the group consisting of almond, beech nut, Brazil nut, Brazilian pine, bunya, butternut, bur oak, Cajou nut, candlenut, cashew, chestnut, chinquapin, coconut, coquito nut, dika nut, gingko, Guiana chestnut, hazelnut (filbert), heartnut, hickory nut, Japanese horse-chestnut, macadamia nut, mongongo nut, monkey-pot, monkey puzzule nut, Okari nut, Pachira nut, peach palm nut, pecan, pistachio, Sapucaia nut, tropical almond, black walnut, English walnut, yellowhorn, and cultivars, varieties and hybrids thereof.

In a further embodiment, the cereal grains are selected from the group consisting of barley, buckwheat, pearl millet, proso millet, oats, corn, field corn, sweet corn, seed corn, popcorn, rice, rye, sorghum (milo), sorghum species, grain sorghum, sudangrass (seed), teosinte, triticale, wheat, wild rice, and cultivars, varieties and hybrids thereof. In a preferred embodiment, the cereal grain is corn. In a more preferred embodiment, the cereal grain is genetically modified corn.

In yet another embodiment, the grass forage, fodder and hay are selected from the group consisting of grasses that are members of the Gramineae family except sugarcane and those species included in the cereal grains group, pasture and range grasses, and grasses grown for hay or silage. In further embodiments, the Gramineae grasses may be green or cured.

In another embodiment, the herbs and spices are selected from the group consisting of allspice, angelica, anise, anise seed, star anise, annatto seed, balm, basil, borage, burnet, chamomile, caper buds, caraway, black caraway, cardamom, cassia bark, cassia buds, catnip, celery seed, chervil, chive, Chinese chive, cinnamon, clary, clove buds, coriander leaf, coriander seed, costmary, cilantro leaves, cilantro seed, culantro leaves, culantro seed, cumin, dillweed, dill seed, fennel, common fennel, Florence fennel seed, fenugreek, grains of paradise, horehound, hyssop, juniper berry, lavender, lemongrass, leaf lovage, seed lovage, mace, marigold, marjoram, mint, mustard seed, nasturtium, nutmeg, parsley, pennyroyal, black pepper, white pepper, poppy seed, rosemary, rue, saffron, sage, summer savory, winter savory, sweet bay, tansy, tarragon, thyme, vanilla, wintergreen, woodruff, wormwood, and cultivars, varieties and hybrids thereof. In a preferred embodiment, the mints are selected from the group consisting of spearmint, peppermint, and hybrids thereof.

In yet another embodiment, artichokes are selected from the group consisting of Chinese artichoke, Jerusalem artichoke, and cultivars, varieties and hybrids thereof.

In an embodiment, the tropical fruits are selected from the group consisting of avocado, fuzzy kiwifruit, hardy kiwifruit, banana, pineapple, and cultivars, varieties and hybrids thereof.

In a further embodiment, the oil seed vegetables are selected from the group consisting of canola, or oil rapeseed, safflower, sunflower, and cultivars, varieties and hybrids thereof.

The synergistic amounts of Bacillus thuringiensis subsp. kurstaki and cyantraniliprole may be applied to seeds, foliage, or an area where a plant is intended to grow.

The synergistic amounts of Bacillus thuringiensis subsp. kurstaki and cyantraniliprole may be applied once or many times during a growing season. If Bacillus thuringiensis subsp. kurstaki and cyantraniliprole are applied more than one time, the total amount applied should not exceed a yearly maximum rate as determined by environmental protection agencies or relevant label rates.

As used herein, “plant” refers to at least one plant and not a plant population.

As used herein, “control” or “controlling” means a decline in the amount of damage to the plants from the larvae, reduction of pest population, interference with life cycle development or other physiological or behavioral effect that results in plant protection.

As used herein, all numerical values relating to amounts, weight percentages and the like, are defined as “about” or “approximately” each particular value, plus or minus 10%. For example, the phrase “at least 5.0% by weight” is to be understood as “at least 4.5% to 5.5% by weight.” Therefore, amounts within 10% of the claimed values are encompassed by the scope of the claims.

The disclosed embodiments are simply exemplary embodiments of the inventive concepts disclosed herein and should not be considered as limiting, unless so stated.

The following examples are intended to illustrate the present invention and to teach one of ordinary skill in the art how to make and use the invention. They are not intended to be limiting in any way.

Examples

The following examples illustrate the synergy of Bacillus thuringiensis subsp. kurstaki and cyantraniliprole when controlling diamondback moth, beet armyworm, sugarcane borer, and soybean looper. DiPel® DF was used as the source of Bacillus thuringiensis subsp. kurstaki and Exirel® was used as the source of cyantraniliprole. The present invention is not limited to the products or formulation types used herein. In each example below, the studies were conducted as follows.

For these tests, standardized laboratory leaf dip methods were used to inoculate plant material with treatment(s). Dry, treated leaves were placed into Petri dishes (100×25 mm) containing filter paper wetted with 500 μl of distilled H₂O (“dH₂O”). Each dish was then infested with between 5 and 10 larvae, dependent on species. Efficacy ratings were taken at specified intervals. Synergy ratings were calculated for each test.

Example 1—Diamondback Moth

In this study, the response of diamondback moth larvae to synergistic amounts of Bacillus thuringiensis subsp. kurstaki (“Btk”) and cyantraniliprole was observed. The results of this study can be seen below in Table 1.

TABLE 1 Time after % Efficacy treat- Neg. Btk + ment Control cyantraniliprole Synergy (h) dH₂O Btk Cyantraniliprole (Ratio 1:0.185) Ratio 24 2 1 16 21 1.25 48 3 6 47 51 No Synergy

As seen in Table 1, the mixtures of the present invention provided more than an additive effect. By using the following formula, Applicant was able to determine that this response was synergistic: % C_(exp)=A+B−(AB/100).

% C_(exp)=A+B−(AB/100), where % C_(exp) is the expected efficacy and “in which A and B are the control levels given by the single [insecticides]. If the ratio between the experimentally observed efficacy of the mixture C_(obs) and the expected efficacy of the mixture is greater than 1, synergistic interactions are present in the mixture.” (Gisi, Synergisitic Interaction of Fungicides in Mixtures, The American Phytopathological Society, 86:11, 1273-1279, 1996). Adopting a conservative approach, Applicant determined synergy to be present at ratios of ≧1.15.

Bacillus thuringiensis subsp. kurstaki was applied at a concentration of 0.54 ppm (0.54 μg/ml). Cyantraniliprole was applied at a concentration of 0.1 ppm (0.1 μg/ml). The Bacillus thuringiensis kurstaki/cyantraniliprole mixture was applied at a concentration of 0.54 ppm Bacillus thuringiensis subsp. kurstaki and 0.1 ppm cyantraniliprole.

In order to determine synergy, rates below normal field rate ranges must be used. If normal field rate ranges are used, all of the larvae would die (combining a lethal or near lethal dose of Bacillus thuringiensis subsp. kurstaki with a lethal dose of cyantraniliprole would most likely lead to larvae death) in every treatment and synergy would not be able to be determined. A ratio that is indicative of synergy is this assay is a predictor of the synergy that will be seen in the field at normal field rates (or at rates that occur naturally as the active ingredients are degraded over time by exposure to rain, UV radiation, and temperature extremes). This assay was chosen for its ability to accurately predict mortality rates of larvae in the field.

The results of this calculation indicated that the synergy ratio was 1.25 at 24 hours. As a finding of higher than 1 is indicative of synergy, ratios of 1.25 is clearly synergistic. Synergy was shown at a ratio of Bacillus thuringiensis subsp. kurstaki to cyantraniliprole of 1:0.185.

Example 2—Beet Armyworm

In this study, the response of beet armyworm larvae to synergistic amounts of Bacillus thuringiensis subsp. kurstaki and cyantraniliprole was observed. The results of this study can be seen below in Table 2.

TABLE 2 Time after % Efficacy treat- Neg. Btk + ment Control cyantraniliprole Synergy (h) dH₂O Btk Cyantraniliprole (Ratio 1:1.85) Ratio 24 0 2 20 24 No Synergy 48 0 3 37 44 1.17

Bacillus thuringiensis subsp. kurstaki was applied at a concentration of 0.54 ppm (0.54 μg/ml). Cyantraniliprole was applied at a concentration of 1.0 ppm (1.0 μg/ml). The Bacillus thuringiensis kurstaki/cyantraniliprole mixture was applied at a concentration of 0.54 ppm Bacillus thuringiensis subsp. kurstaki and 1.0 ppm cyantraniliprole.

As seen in Table 2, the mixtures of the present invention provided a more than additive effect. By using the following formula, Applicant was able to determine that this response was synergistic: % C_(exp)=A+B−(AB/100).

The results of this calculation indicated that the synergy ratio was 1.17 at 48 hours. As a finding of higher than 1 is indicative of synergy, ratios of 1.17 and 2.02 is clearly synergistic. Synergy was shown at a ratio of Bacillus thuringiensis subsp. kurstaki to cyantraniliprole of 1:1.85.

Example 3—Cabbage Looper

In this study, the response of cabbage looper larvae to Bacillus thuringiensis subsp. kurstaki and cyantraniliprole was observed. The results of this study can be seen below in Table 3.

TABLE 3 Time after % Efficacy treat- Neg. Btk + ment Control cyantraniliprole Synergy (h) dH₂O Btk Cyantraniliprole (Ratio 1:0.926) Ratio 24 0 2 15 12 No Synergy 48 0 5 51 44 No Synergy

Bacillus thuringiensis subsp. kurstaki was applied at a concentration of 0.54 ppm (0.54 μg/ml). Cyantraniliprole was applied at a concentration of 0.50 ppm (0.50 μg/ml). The Bacillus thuringiensis kurstaki/cyantraniliprole mixture was applied at a concentration of 0.54 ppm Bacillus thuringiensis subsp. kurstaki and 0.50 ppm cyantraniliprole.

As seen in Table 3, the mixtures of the present invention failed to provide a more than additive effect. By using the following formula, Applicant was able to determine that this response was synergistic: % C_(exp)=A+B−(AB/100).

Example 4—Sugarcane Borer

In this study, the response of sugarcane borer larvae to synergistic amounts of Bacillus thuringiensis subsp. kurstaki and cyantraniliprole was observed. The results of this study can be seen below in Table 4.

TABLE 4 Time after % Efficacy treat- Neg. Btk + ment Control cyantraniliprole Synergy (h) dH₂O Btk Cyantraniliprole (Ratio 1:1.85) Ratio 24 0 0 30 38 1.26 48 0 4 32 41 1.18

Bacillus thuringiensis subsp. kurstaki was applied at a concentration of 0.54 ppm (0.54 μg/ml). Cyantraniliprole was applied at a concentration of 1.0 ppm (1.0 μg/ml). The Bacillus thuringiensis kurstaki/cyantraniliprole mixture was applied at a concentration of 0.54 ppm Bacillus thuringiensis subsp. kurstaki and 1.0 ppm cyantraniliprole.

As seen in Table 4, the mixtures of the present invention provided synergy against this species. By using the following formula, Applicant was able to determine that this response was synergistic: % C_(exp)=A+B−(AB/100).

The results of this calculation indicated that the synergy was 1.26 at 24 hours and 1.18 at 48 hours. As a finding of higher than 1 is indicative of synergy, the ratios of 1.91 and 1.67 are synergistic. Synergy was shown at a ratio of Bacillus thuringiensis subsp. kurstaki to cyantraniliprole of 1:1.85.

Example 5—Southwestern Corn Borer

In this study, the response of southwestern corn borer larvae to Bacillus thuringiensis subsp. kurstaki and cyantraniliprole was observed. The results of this study can be seen below in Table 5.

TABLE 5 Time after % Efficacy treat- Neg. Btk + ment Control cyantraniliprole Synergy (h) dH₂O Btk Cyantraniliprole (Ratio 1:0.185) Ratio 24 1 1 23 19 No Synergy 48 6 12 39 25 No Synergy

Bacillus thuringiensis subsp. kurstaki was applied at a concentration of 0.54 ppm (0.54 μg/ml). Cyantraniliprole was applied at a concentration of 0.1 ppm (0.1 μg/ml). The Bacillus thuringiensis kurstaki/cyantraniliprole mixture was applied at a concentration of 0.54 ppm Bacillus thuringiensis subsp. kurstaki and 0.1 ppm cyantraniliprole.

As seen in Table 5, the mixtures of the present did not provide synergy against this species. By using the following formula, Applicant was able to determine that this response was not synergistic: % C_(exp)=A+B−(AB/100).

Example 6—Soybean Looper

In this study, the response of soybean looper larvae to synergistic amounts of Bacillus thuringiensis subsp. kurstaki and cyantraniliprole was observed. The results of this study can be seen below in Table 6.

TABLE 6 Time after % Efficacy treat- Neg. Btk + ment Control cyantraniliprole Synergy (h) dH₂O Btk Cyantraniliprole (Ratio 1:7.2) Ratio 24 0 0 6 6 No Synergy 48 0 1 10 13 1.18

Bacillus thuringiensis subsp. kurstaki was applied at a concentration of 0.54 ppm (0.54 μg/ml). Cyantraniliprole was applied at a concentration of 1.0 ppm (1.0 μg/ml). The Bacillus thuringiensis kurstaki/cyantraniliprole mixture was applied at a concentration of 0.54 ppm Bacillus thuringiensis subsp. kurstaki and 1.0 ppm cyantraniliprole.

As seen in Table 6, the mixtures of the present invention provided a more than additive effect. By using the following formula, Applicant was able to determine that this response was synergistic: % C_(exp)=A+B−(AB/100).

The results of this calculation indicated that the synergy ratio was 1.18 at 48 hours. As a finding of higher than 1 is indicative of synergy, the ratio of 1.18 is synergistic. Synergy was shown at a ratio of Bacillus thuringiensis subsp. kurstaki to cyantraniliprole of 1:1.85.

Example 7—Corn Earworm

In this study, the response of corn earworm larvae to Bacillus thuringiensis subsp. kurstaki and cyantraniliprole was observed. The results of this study can be seen below in Table 7.

TABLE 7 Time after % Efficacy treat- Neg. Btk + ment Control cyantraniliprole Synergy (h) dH₂O Btk Cyantraniliprole (Ratio 1:1.81) Ratio 24 4 6 29 38 No Synergy 48 4 8 33 44 No Synergy

Bacillus thuringiensis subsp. kurstaki was applied at a concentration of 0.54 ppm (0.54 μg/ml). Cyantraniliprole was applied at a concentration of 10.0 ppm (10.0 μg/ml). The Bacillus thuringiensis kurstaki/cyantraniliprole mixture was applied at a concentration of 0.54 ppm Bacillus thuringiensis subsp. kurstaki and 10.0 ppm cyantraniliprole.

As seen in Table 7, the mixtures of the present invention did not provide a more than additive effect. By using the following formula, Applicant was able to determine that this response was not synergistic: % C_(exp)=A+B−(AB/100).

In summary, synergy was seen against diamondback moth, beet armyworm, sugarcane borer, and soybean looper. Synergy was not seen on southwestern corn borer, corn earworm or cabbage looper. 

We claim:
 1. A method of controlling a crop plant pest selected from the group consisting of diamondback moth (Plutella xylostella), beet armyworm (Spodoptera exigua), sugarcane borer (Diatraea saccharalis), and soybean looper (Chrysodeixis includens) comprising applying a synergistic amount of Bacillus thuringiensis subsp. kurstaki and cyantraniliprole to a plant, wherein the weight ratio of Bacillus thuringiensis subsp. kurstaki to cyantraniliprole is from about 1:0.0025 to about 1:15.
 2. The method of claim 1 wherein the weight ratio of Bacillus thuringiensis subsp. kurstaki to cyantraniliprole is from about 1:0.01 to about 1:7.5.
 3. The method of claim 2 wherein the weight ratio of Bacillus thuringiensis subsp. kurstaki to cyantraniliprole is from about 1:0.04 to about 1:3.5.
 4. The method of claim 1 wherein the amount of Bacillus thuringiensis subsp. kurstaki is from about 50 to about 4,500 grams per hectare.
 5. The method of claim 4 wherein the amount of Bacillus thuringiensis subsp. kurstaki is from about 100 to about 1,300 grams per hectare.
 6. The method of claim 5 wherein the amount of Bacillus thuringiensis subsp. kurstaki is from about 150 to about 1,250 grams per hectare.
 7. The method of claim 1 wherein the amount of cyantraniliprole is from about 10 to about 700 grams per hectare.
 8. The method of claim 7 wherein the amount of cyantraniliprole is from about 25 to about 600 grams per hectare.
 9. The method of claim 8 wherein the amount of cyantraniliprole is from about 50 to about 525 grams per hectare.
 10. The method of claim 1 wherein the crop plant pest is Beet armyworm (Spodoptera exigua).
 11. The method of claim 1 wherein the crop plant pest is Soybean looper (Chrysodeixis includens).
 12. The method of claim 1 wherein the crop plant pest is sugarcane borer (Diatraea saccharalis).
 13. The method of claim 1 wherein the crop plant pest is diamondback moth (Plutella xylostella).
 14. The method of claim 1 wherein the plant is selected from the group consisting of root, corm and tuber vegetables, bulb vegetables, leafy non-brassica vegetables, leafy brassica vegetables, succulent or dried legumes, fruiting vegetables, cucurbit vegetables, citrus fruits, pome fruits, stone fruits, berry and small fruits, tree nuts, cereal grains, forage and fodder grasses and hay, herbs, spices, artichoke, asparagus, coffee, cotton, tropical fruits, hops, malanga, peanut, pomegranate, oil seed vegetables, sugarcane, tobacco, and watercress.
 15. The method of claim 14 wherein the plant is genetically modified.
 16. The method of claim 14 wherein the cereal grains are selected from the group consisting of barley, buckwheat, pearl millet, proso millet, oats, corn, field corn, sweet corn, seed corn, popcorn, rice, rye, sorghum (milo), sorghum species, grain sorghum, sudangrass (seed), teosinte, triticale, wheat, wild rice, and cultivars, varieties and hybrids thereof.
 17. The method of claim 16 wherein the plant is genetically modified corn.
 18. The method of claim 14 wherein the succulent or dried vegetable legumes are selected from the group consisting of Lupinus beans, Phaseolus beans, Vigna beans, broad beans, chickpea, guar, jackbean, lablab bean, lentil, Pisum peas, pigeon pea, soybean, immature seed soybean, sword bean, peanut, and cultivars, varieties and hybrids thereof.
 19. The method of claim 18 wherein the plant is genetically modified soybean. 